Martes, 20 Noviembre, 2018

Supreme Court declines to hear challenge to NC voter ID law ruling

The Supreme Court Passes On Reviving A North Carolina Law That Discriminates Against Black Americans The Supreme Court Refuses To Hear North Carolina's Bid To Revive Its Controversial Voter ID Law
Eleena Tovar | 15 May, 2017, 18:42

"Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this Court under North Carolina law, it is important to recall our frequent admonition that '[t] he denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case, '" Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court in the opinion released this morning. "While Governor Cooper and Attorney General Stein have stymied voter ID for now, they will ultimately lose in their efforts to block North Carolina citizens from having these protections".

Although North Carolina Republicans won a late night budget battle over the weekend, Democratics achieved a higher legislative victory on Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to review the state's highly controversial voter ID law.

A lawyer for the state, urging the Supreme Court to take its appeal, said the photo ID law is more lenient than one upheld by the court eight years ago.

A unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit had found in 2016 that North Carolina legislators had acted "with nearly surgical precision" to blunt the influence of African American voters.

A unanimous panel of the 4th Circuit on July 29 agreed with allegations from the Justice Department and civil rights groups that North Carolina's bill selectively chose voter-ID requirements, reduced the number of early-voting days and changed registration procedures in ways meant to harm blacks, who overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic Party.

In their unanimous decision, the Fourth Circuit's panel of three Democratic judges struck down key parts of the law, which they argued was created to "target African-Americans with nearly surgical precision" in certain precincts. That led Republican lawmakers in the state to argue the Attorney General can not dismiss the case and the General Assembly has the right to hire outside counsel to defend the laws.

Roberts, however, also stressed that the justices weren't deciding that the lower court was right to strike down the North Carolina requirements.

Following two trials, a federal judge issued a lengthy opinion finding those reforms had neither discriminatory effect nor intent.

And since then-AG (and future governor) Roy Cooper wouldn't contend the Fourth Circuit's decision, McCrory went so far as to claim he would take his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

North Carolina's attorney general is not defending the law.